> The updated ADA includes the new Microsoft Store fee structure that delivers up to 95 percent of the revenue back to consumer app developers. To ensure you receive the full 95 percent revenue, be sure to instrument your referring traffic URLs with a CID.
Consider Spotify vs Apple music. If Spotify has to charge X + 30% to subscriber's on iPhone in order to make X then they absolutely can't compete on price if Apple simply charges X.
You're just making things up. Apple has explicit exceptions for multi platform subscriptions. The only condition they require is that developers should not cripple the iOS app by removing the ability to create an account from within the app (which means your app essentially has to offer in app purchases as a valid way of obtaining a subscription).
If users want they can create an account on Mac (or even on iOS Safari) and set up a subscription with lower fees outside the app and then use it inside the app.
People can easily use the Netflix accounts they created on their Mac on iOS with no extra charge.
What's not allowed is making an iOS app where you are shown a login screen but no way of creating an account from within inside the app, which forces you to use a separate platform to create the account. The idea is that an iPhone or iPad should be a standalone device and not require the help of another platform or device to do basic things like create an account.
Can you create a netflix account within the app on iOS? I thought they specifically had an exception for "reader apps" (and Netflix somehow fell in that category).
It's not relevant. The cut taken is not the point. It's that the app store is the only avenue onto an iOS device. EVERY OTHER meaningful computing platform (that is, not solely a gaming device) has multiple avenues to acquire and install software. Not iOS, and that's the issue.
I don't know why I keep expecting users here to understand this. It's not going to happen.
What about Chrome OS? Only some chromebooks have unlocked bootloaders, otherwise there is no way to install new software besides web apps or browser extensions.
Maybe you just play some games and never were a developer but 30% sounds like a huge fee when you literally have no other way to sell than to use dominating platforms of iOS, Android and Steam.
It was only natural that some successful company would start the fight on behalf of everyone else thinking the cut is too high.
For users, it could mean the reduction of price but users are just too satisfied, they don't care what the developers think but be pets on the platforms.
Companies are free to set their own prices. Setting a price that matches your competitor's price is a standard business practice and is not considered price fixing as long as there was no coordination with the competitor.
In other words:
1. If Apple went and talked to Google and Microsoft and they all agreed to set the price to 30%, that would be price fixing.
2. If Apple looked at Microsoft and saw that they had set their price to 30% and decided they wanted to do that too, that is not price fixing.
It isn't the 30%! It's that there's only a single way into iOS. It's a literal monopoly, and they are large enough that this matters, now.